|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
my rating |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4.15
| 8,675
| Oct 1979
| Oct 1979
|
really liked it
|
HD Film Tributes music video: Halloween main theme by John Carpenter. I'm the only person I know who has the soundtrack to this movie on CD. My friend
HD Film Tributes music video: Halloween main theme by John Carpenter. I'm the only person I know who has the soundtrack to this movie on CD. My friends used to make fun of me over the fact, and well they should. Firstly, if you have a copy of this, hold on to that shit, and save it for some rough times! The cheapest one of these I could find was $250, which is well out of my price range. I mean, shit, that's like a car payment! Or at least it used to be. Fortunately some unscrupulous soul has done and put this up on the internet so that this unscrupulous soul could read it. You know, I took an ethics class in college. It must not have made much of an impression. Oh well. This was fantastic, at least for a novelization. The story in the book and the movie are pretty much the same, scene for scene except in the beginning. It gave some background information about Michael that let us know what the hell was the matter with the boy. I liked those scenes. However, it also gave us scenes from his point of view which let us know what he was thinking, and I wasn't all that keen on that. In the movie, Michael kills his sister and then shuts up for the rest of his life. When he gets stabbed or injured in any kind of way, he does it Timex style by taking the licking and keeping on ticking. (Well, after a brief fainting spell to reset himself, but nobody's perfect.) He also attacks everyone Charlie Chaplin style: silently. (Except for his breathing. Like I said; imperfect.) He's always there, and his victims have no intimation of his coming. I find the silence and mystery much more menacing than any noise and explanations. I always thought of him as a kind of Jaws who just stalks and kills. (Kind of like a landshark!) There isn't really much rhyme or reason behind it; it's just what he does. The book gives us his POV and thoughts from time to time, and that kind of lessens the terror you get in the movie. It humanizes him a bit, and one of his most terrifying traits was his complete disconnect from humanity. He also talks for the first few years in the institution, and he's usually grunting when physical exertion requires it. This is certainly terrifying since he is killing your ass, after all, but doing all that silently seems scarier to me. Also, we learn that Michael Myers often has a raging boner when he stalks his prey, and nowhere in this book does it mention that he takes care of it. I'm sure you know what this means. If the boy had just learned how to jack off, he could've gotten everything out of his system, and about 90 people would be alive today. (See comments section below). We won't count his sister Judith since he was only six then, and masturbation is a skill typically picked up during adolescence, but surely he should've learned how to wax the bishop sometime in the following 15 years. I was 12 myself when I stumbled upon this vital, life-saving skill, but I had some friends who started as young as 10 and two who claim they were 18 before they gave in to temptation. (One of them I actually believe.) But Michael was fucking 21 years old and must've had blue balls from hell. No wonder he was so pissed off! This is recommended just for die-hard fans of the movie who would like a little bit of extra background info. The book is quite good, but the movie is better. Appendix from the Damn Fool Archives: Back in the MySpace days... [image] Hi! Oh, look! It's my first social network friend, Tom, come to say how-do! Anyway, as I was saying, back in the MySpace days, I did three blog entries tallying up Michael Myers' kills, and I eventually copied them over to Facebook a few years later, and I saved all those notes when I got off Facebook about 10 years ago. Back in 2006, the internet didn't have this information, though it's since been added at some fan sites, and those counts differ from mine by a couple of deaths. They're probably right, and I'm not going to argue with them since I really don't care. I'm going to post my blogs in the comments section complete with spelling and grammatical errors (and possibly some bad math). They cover the original run of movies from Halloween (1978) through Resurrection. Making sense of the franchise since then has gotten confusing. There are 13 movies now, but not all of them relate to each other. You can watch the first series which has seven movies, (movies one and two and four through eight; part three is always ignored since Michael Myers isn't in it, but it still technically counts as a Halloween movie due to the title.) Or you can watch the second series which is movies nine and ten and counts as a reboot. (I don't recommend this.) Or you can watch the third series which covers movies one and 11 through 13. (Movies two through ten were kicked out of the band to make this work.) One can only hope that they are now done with this madness. Enjoy. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Oct 15, 2023
|
Oct 18, 2023
|
Oct 04, 2023
|
Mass Market Paperback
| |||||||||||||||||
| 1781161062
| 9781781161067
| 1781161062
| 4.15
| 1,363
| Jan 01, 2012
| Jul 24, 2012
|
really liked it
|
(Spoilers not marked since I'm assuming anybody interested in reading this has already seen the movie and knows what happens.) This is the best written (Spoilers not marked since I'm assuming anybody interested in reading this has already seen the movie and knows what happens.) This is the best written of the three novels in this trilogy. (Sorry Denny.) And it's miles ahead of the Burton Batmans. (Not sorry at all Craig. Bad novelizations. Bad, bad novelizations!) But that doesn't mean this didn't have its annoyances. Coincidentally, Greg does the same kind of thing Craig Shaw Gardner does with a chatty inner monologue for a couple of characters, but not to the same degree, thank God. They're just snippets peppered all throughout the novel, but some of them are out of place and just don't work very well, or they interrupt the action. E.g.: Throughout the story Catwoman has a hankering to escape to the French Riviera. At the end, she's trapped in Gotham just like everybody else. She finds herself in a dangerous situation and she thinks "the French Riviera was looking better all the time." That kind of line would've made sense if she were debating whether or not to leave Gotham and still actually had a chance to get out, but at that point it was pointless. Then there are other chatty snippets that work just fine; it's hard to explain, and I suspect many of the ones that annoyed me would've been removed or moved somewhere else had it gone through another round of editing, but time is limited when you're trying to get a book out at the same time as the movie. Thankfully they did much better with this one than The Dark Knight, for there were very few typos, and it was structurally sound. It's even more impressive given that this was over 400 pages, about 125 pages more than DK. As for differences between the book and the movie, I don't know that there are any. A couple of scenes and characters are fleshed out more, but just barely. Most of the lines are identical or slightly altered. Either almost no changes were made from screenplay to film, or Greg worked very closely with the production crew while it was being filmed and during post production, and he was able to make changes on the go. This movie/story seems to be a love or hate piece for most fans of the trilogy. One friend of mine hated it when it came out because "it made Occupy Wall Street look bad." (I personally thought OWS made itself look bad without any help from anybody else.) A lot of people thought part of the movie was based on OWS, but this is easy to disprove. Filming took place from May to November of 2011. OWS didn't even start until September 17, 2011, and it took a week or 10 days to gain major traction in the media which brings it close to October. (While it was getting kicked off, the same friend who gave me the quote above was saying the media was trying to repress it and not cover it which is a sick joke. They loved it from the start and covered it plenty, but it was a few days before it became the leading story. That friend and I never discussed this kind of stuff with each other; I just saw those things on his Facebook page.) Anyway, people were apparently suggesting that the producers/director/actors/writers/crew and everyone got together in the last month of filming to make changes to reflect a current event... I'm sorry, making a movie doesn't work that way. Leaving aside the logistics, consider also the logic. Hollywood is liberal as hell and they were falling all over themselves to proclaim their support for OWS in spite of the fact that several of them fell squarely in the 1% category. You expect me to believe they made changes to this movie just to trash a leftist movement that they loved? Add to this the fact that Christopher Nolan flat out refuted the accusation (while also pointing out the logistical points I mentioned above), and it should be easy to see that the parallels were a complete coincidence. But sometimes that's all that's needed to hate on something, and... [image] (Although this image just begged to be used here, I think it's worth hating, but I digress.) The parts of the movie concerning corporate greed, class disparity, have-not mobs rioting on the haves, and whatnot is more about Bane being villainous than social justice; that's the point of that, not to mention everything else Bane does. The scene at the stock exchange, though, provides us with the best line in the movie/book: [image] That one's right up there with: [image] In fact, Bane gets all the best lines in this story, though the other characters have a few good ones too. As for the story, I love it, and it's more believable than its predecessor. The Dark Knight is my favorite movie in the trilogy. A lot of it is a mess, but you don't notice it in the movie because it moves so quickly. The flaws are laid bare in the written form because you have more time to think about what's happening and you realize that most of it could never happen. This story doesn't have that problem, at least not with the plot itself, which is part of what makes it a better read. Suspension of disbelief is needed for some medical matters such as Batman's recovery at the beginning, then how he breaks his back, and further how it's fixed. You don't get that kind of injury from that kind of maneuver, and you can't just punch a dislocated vertebrae back into place. If you could, back surgeons would also be karate senseis and have to pass a course in Kirk Chiropractics. Has a mean man given you a strange click-clack in the back of your sacroiliac? [image] Uh huh! Did he also contuse your cervical center? [image] Yeah! Then you need the captain's L1, C7 adjustment! [image] Yes, the L1, C7 combo will put that pesky popped spine right back into place. [image] It's not impossible! You can get it with a twist! [image] No lumbar displacement? No problem! Go halfsies with a C7 chop to fix that crick in the neck. [image] Plus, the technique is so easy to master, that amateurs can do it at home. [image] So kick that cane to the curb... [image] ...and get your back back into shape with the L1, C7 punch today. [image] Would you butt out? Sheesh! ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jan 21, 2024
|
Jan 27, 2024
|
Jul 17, 2022
|
Mass Market Paperback
| ||||||||||||||
| 0446354872
| 9780446354875
| 0446354872
| 3.64
| 1,191
| 1988
| Jan 01, 1989
|
liked it
|
2.5 stars rounded up to three. It pains me to do it, but even that's being generous, for this is merely "okay." The extra half star is a nod to the mo
2.5 stars rounded up to three. It pains me to do it, but even that's being generous, for this is merely "okay." The extra half star is a nod to the movie which is one of my faves. Not just favorite Batman or comic book movie, but one of my favorite movies ever. It's probably in my top ten, but more on that in a bit. As for this book... Well, it's a novelization, so we shouldn't expect too much to begin with, but even among that class of, ahem, literature, this ain't great. The story would be great in a comic book format, but it's not in that format; it's in prose, and I'm sorry, but it just doesn't work very well. It would be better if the writing were better, but that wasn't great either. This makes me nervous because Gardner also wrote Batman Returns which is on the docket for this year's Christmas reading. The characters aren't quite right (especially Batman), and the parts from the Joker's point of view were annoying, though Gardner did a good job of showing us that he was a complete loon detached from reality. The love scenes were blech, and the action scenes didn't always translate well to the page. Plus there were a few editing errors and one part where two short paragraphs were repeated right after each other. I think my copy is a first edition, and if this ever gets a reprinting, hopefully they will fix all that. As with most novelizations, this was based on the screenplay. The first half matched the movie pretty closely, but a few scenes were left out of the second half or were heavily altered. As usual, this was a good thing. I've gushed over this movie in another review where I also sum up my love affair with it and all things Batman/Joker, so I'll try to leave personal details out of this review. The movie is a cinematic work of art. This is the fault of Tim Burton, Danny Elfman, Prince, the cast (especially Jack Nicholson, the best comic book version of the Joker you'll ever see [Heath Ledger wins the more serious Dark Knight version {Why so serious?!}]), the sets, the costumes, etc., but I've discovered that we can't really blame the story because when you take away all the dressing, what's left is mediocre at best. In someone else's hands, this movie could've been complete crap. In fact, that's exactly how it played out with a couple of sequels. (I won't mention the name, but it starts with Joel T. Schumacher.)* But Tim Burton did this one, and it ended up being one of the biggest pop culture phenomenons in my lifetime. Seriously, you could not get away from Batman in the summer of 1989. Batmania was inescapable no matter your age or whether or not you had the slightest interest in it. Not since the DALLAS "Who shot JR?" craze of 1980 was the public so caught up in something for a whole summer. The Batman logo was on everything from t-shirts to shoes, and even cut into hairdos. It also changed the game for the entire film industry with its aggressive marketing campaign. It broke a lot of records for opening weekend and even the second weekend. It went to VHS a mere five months after it came out which was unheard of back then, and that happened a month before it was even finished in the theaters, which I'm not sure had ever happened before. (Can you imagine a movie staying in the theaters for six months nowadays?) It also made comic book movies interesting for adults which had happened only once before with 1978's Superman, and I believe the subsequent interest for all comic book movies can be traced to this one. Not only that, it has withstood the test of time probably because it's timeless. Can you put a timestamp on the setting? 80s technology mixed with 40s fashion doesn't really belong anywhere, but anyone from any time can appreciate it. It has several quotable lines from the Joker that people still recognize 30 years later. When Stephen King's It was adapted for the screen, the setting was updated to 1989, and you can see what they chose to put on the marquee at the Aladdin Theater. [image] I mean, 1989 was a bumper year for movies and they picked Batman and Lethal Weapon 2. I say all that just to point out that Batman was a big deal in spite of its major shortcoming which is the story, but the production quality of the movie was so great that I never even noticed that until now. I'll close with my usual novelization review advice and suggest that you just watch the movie instead of reading this. And also enjoy various songs from the soundtrack found in the reading progress below. *Don't get me wrong. I love some of Schumacher's other work such as The Lost Boys and The Client, but his treatment of the Batman movies leaves much to be desired (like a cyanide cocktail), and his version of The Phantom of the Opera is damn near unforgivable. My ears still haven't recovered from the 20 minutes I saw of that, and that was at least 15 years ago! ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Nov 08, 2022
|
Nov 12, 2022
|
Jul 15, 2022
|
Paperback
| ||||||||||||||
| 0425222861
| 9780425222867
| 0425222861
| 4.10
| 1,367
| Jan 01, 2008
| Jul 18, 2008
|
liked it
|
I'm assuming a hard deadline crept up on Dennis O'Neil, because you can tell this one was rushed to the printing press. It didn't end abruptly like Gh
I'm assuming a hard deadline crept up on Dennis O'Neil, because you can tell this one was rushed to the printing press. It didn't end abruptly like Ghostbusters II, but the ending could've been fleshed out just a little bit more. Actually, a lot in the second half could've been fleshed out more. There was a lot of extra info in the first half, and it worked well, but then that stopped. I think if Dennis had had a couple more months and been able to do a couple rounds of editing, stuff from the first half might've ended up on the cutting room floor, and there would've been more added in the second half. There are a couple of chapters with the Scarecrow that could've been left out completely. The only reason he's in there is to introduce another character (The Chechen) and to show that there are Batman copycats running around. However, we get his whole backstory which really belonged in Batman Begins. We also get some backstory for The Chechen and Harvey Dent, but it felt like one part in Harvey's was left open with the intention to close it up later, but it never was. The Joker does one scene pretty early in the book, but then doesn't show up again until page 125, nearly 100 pages later and almost at the halfway point. After that, things clip along faster, and it becomes a strict screenplay to page deal. I'm guessing Dennis ran out of time to make this more literary. Also, there were a few typos ("warm" instead of "warn," "willl," etc. Sloppy errors. The part where the Joker is trying to get Harvey Dent in the armored car and Batman is wrecking his Tumbler... I'm sorry, that whole section is just a mess. I don't think an editor even looked at it. The Batmobile is wrecked at one part and he's on his pod (the motorcycle thing) and guards are grabbing at his forearms. Then all of a sudden he's rolling again in the Batmobile which I assume rejuvenated itself like Christine. [image] Then the car is wrecked again and he whips out the pod. After that, he does some fancy shit with a harpooned steel line which is impossible (he wraps it around a light pole several times which he couldn't do without snagging it with his own vehicle. Thankfully the movie corrected that). Furthermore, the timing is way off with a lot of events. Something will happen, then several days will pass, then all of a sudden you're back to the day the first event happened. Sometimes Batman or the Joker or Gordon would be at one place, then two minutes later they're somewhere else with no explanation on how they teleported from point A to point B. And Bruce/Batman must be one hell of a quick-change artist. It took him approximately 1.5 seconds to get out of his tux and into the Batsuit during his party for Harvey Dent. [image] (Maybe he had an instant costume change Batpole like Adam West.) The Joker already had a razor to Rachel's mouth when Bruce was just going into his "panic room," then three seconds later he's behind the Joker, ready to fight, so either the Joker just stood there with the blade for several minutes, or Batman apparated into the room. And how Rachel got from the room where Bruce knocked out Harvey and back into the main room for the party wasn't explained either. Also, Gordon seemed to be eight places at once a couple of times. [image] (Maybe he was a spy from Marvel.) It was very difficult to keep up with it all. Aside from the impossible shit I mentioned above, so much of this story is implausible, but anyone who's seen the movie would know that already. Does nobody notice a bus backed into the front of the bank for several minutes? Wouldn't it be blocking traffic? Does nobody on the ferries notice the bombs in the engine room? It must've taken hours to rig up the explosives in the hospital, did nobody see anything? And that's all just for starters! The Joker's plans are so convoluted that there's no way he could pull all of them off. One small hiccup in any of them, and the whole thing would fall apart. He must be one hell of a clairvoyant. Unlike Batman Begins, this story isn't great when you take it away from the cinema. The pacing, action, and actors make the film work, and let's be honest here: Heath Ledger's performance made that movie. The Joker in the book is still fun, but HL's acting put it over the top. I'm not just saying that because he died while making it (16 years ago today coincidentally [1/22/24]); it really is a stellar performance. Also, every change in dialogue and action from the book/screenplay to the movie was an improvement, so just watch that instead. I enjoyed reading the book, but I don't think everyone would because it's a bit of a mess. It's a shame Dennis wasn't able to polish it up before turning it in. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jan 18, 2024
|
Jan 21, 2024
|
Jul 15, 2022
|
Mass Market Paperback
| ||||||||||||||
| 0345400798
| 9780345400796
| 0345400798
| 4.06
| 10,668
| Jun 06, 1983
| Aug 29, 1995
|
really liked it
|
3.5 stars rounded up to four. My memories were correct; this is the best written of the original trilogy novelizations. That doesn't mean it's great li 3.5 stars rounded up to four. My memories were correct; this is the best written of the original trilogy novelizations. That doesn't mean it's great literature. After all, the bar was set pretty low with the first two installments. But if you read a novelization of a movie expecting prose that will knock you off your feet, you're asking to be disappointed. Still, there was nothing in here that made me roll my eyes... well, too much. At least there was nothing that made me wince. This is good because Mr. Kahn also wrote one of the Indiana Jones novelizations I have on deck. Almost every change in the final cut of the movie is an improvement over the screenplay which is what this book was based on, but there are a couple of minor scenes I wish they had left in involving the Emperor. He questions Luke about who taught him after Obi-Wan died. After he discovers it was Yoda, he kind of mocks him using Yoda's object-subject-verb sentence structure for a couple of lines. It was a nice touch. And while we're on the subject, why couldn't the greatest Jedi of all time learn to form a simple declarative sentence? [image] The Emperor also orders Jerjerrod to use the Death Star to destroy the moon of Endor if the shield goes down. He does this in front of Luke to make him angrier, but he's serious about the order and is just fine with all the imperials on the planet getting blown to perdition along with the rebels. Jerjerrod almost pulls it off, but Lando and Wedge blow up the Death Star in the nick of time. That plot twist was a nice touch, and I would like to have seen it in the movie. Another scene I'd like to have seen was Luke constructing his new lightsaber in Obi-Wan's old hut on Tatooine before sending Artoo and Threepio on their quest to Jabba's palace, though I can see why it was left out. It doesn't really fit in well, and going from Vader landing on the Death Star to the droids walking the desert works great. The lightsaber thing was just another nice touch. But the rest of the stuff getting left out was just fine. A lot of the early scenes with the Ewoks (Leia meeting Wicket, the others getting captured, then released, then explaining the Rebellion and the universe to the Ewoks, etc.) are extensively expanded. These stayed on the cutting room floor which is right where they need to be. We also get Vader's and Luke's inner thoughts and struggles, though I wish we didn't. It makes Vader much less hardcore, and Luke more wishy-washy. I always assumed Luke had gotten over all that silliness between Empire and this story, and it's easy to make that assumption if you stick with the movies. In fact, all of the characters are better in the movies, mostly due to the actors who portrayed them including the five puppeteers who operated Jabba. (Side note: I found out about the puppeteers a few years later on some TV documentary. I assumed they were all still in the costume when Jabba's sail barge blew up, and I wondered how the producers could let five people die just to make a movie... I was a rather stupid child.) And now for some more movie talk. (Book review is over; these are just some memories I feel like dropping here.) This wasn't the first movie I saw in the theater (that honor belongs to E.T.), but it's definitely the one that made the biggest impression on my youth. In fact, it might be safe to say it made the biggest impression on me of any movie I've ever seen in the theater in my entire life. I was only four years old, and I remember the experience clearly. Mama and daddy took me, and I had to sit on one of our orange sofa pillows, or maybe even both of them, to see over the seat in front of me. Jabba was the best thing I had ever seen until I saw the Rancor. I tried to make my lips purse out as long as Sy Snootles', because why not? [image] "Kiss me, you fool." And if I'd had my way, Lapti Nek would've been in the Billboard top 40. I was so enthralled with the speeder bike chase that I actually felt like I was flying through the woods myself when I watched it. (I guess being in a big theater can have that affect on a little tyke.) Then there was the piece de resistance: [image] I've been trying to learn this skill for the past 39 years ever since I saw it, and if you ever see me with a scowl on my face and pointing all my fingers at you, you better believe I'm frying your ass in my mind. I've never been a super fan of the Ewoks, even when I first saw them, though I know they were geared towards someone my age, but I've also never disliked them. I used to like the two Ewok movies when I was a lad (The Ewok Adventure [later called Caravan of Courage] and The Battle for Endor). Mama found them on DVD several years ago, but I've not been brave enough to try them again. I have a feeling they both actually suck, and I don't want to make that discovery since I watched them all the time back in the day (hallelujah for VCRs). Hell, the second one stars Wilford Brimley, so how good could it possibly be? [image] "I may not be able to use the force, but only I can save the Ewoks from diabeetus." What the hell am I talking about? I seem to be setting forth on one of my typical digressions. My apologies. Anyway, just like I state in my other reviews for this series, just watch the movie instead of reading the book unless you're a die hard Star Wars fan. This book adds more than the others, but I'm not sure if it was worth adding. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Apr 2022
|
Apr 18, 2022
|
Jan 01, 2022
|
Hardcover
| ||||||||||||||
| 034540078X
| 9780345400789
| 034540078X
| 4.10
| 13,111
| May 01, 1980
| Aug 29, 1995
|
liked it
|
HD Film Tributes music video: The Imperial March by John Williams, one of the most recognizable and felicitous themes ever written for cinema. Update, HD Film Tributes music video: The Imperial March by John Williams, one of the most recognizable and felicitous themes ever written for cinema. Update, 6/1/23 This bit is about one scene in the movie, but this has been festering for years, and I must vent my spleen on the matter before it utterly consumes me and turns me to the dark side. Most of the special edition changes annoy me, but this one outshines them all and pushes me to sheer madness. Yes, even more than the Han Solo/Greedo thing in the first movie. The scene: Darth is rappin' with Papa Palps holo-time style when P tells DV the kid who blew up the Death Star is the son of Anakin Skywalker. Vader's response to this bit of intel? "How is that possible?" [image] How is that possible? How is that possible???!!! With these four little words, George Lucas takes Darth Vader from the most badass villain of all time to the biggest dunderhead of all time. Why, why, why, why, WHY?! Let's look at some facts that Vader has before him. He knows that his wife was super preggers and ready to pop the last time he saw her. He knows that Obi-Wan was in the same place with her when Anakin got carved up. He knows this Death-Star-blowing-up kid is about the same age his own kid would've been. The kid shares a surname with Vader's previous self, and Skywalker doesn't seem to be a common surname in that galaxy far, far away. He came from Tatooine, the same planet from which Vader originally hails and where Vader had some step-relatives. He came to the Death Star with Obi-Wan who also came from Tatooine. He knows the force is strong in the boy just like it is in him. It even says in the opening crawl to the movie, which flies right over one of his Star Destroyers, that he is "obsessed with finding young Skywalker," and I'm sure one of his underlings could've clued him in to the fact if he had forgotten... Just whom does Vader think he has been chasing for the past three years?! I mean, we don't need Sherlock Holmes to figure this out. Inspector Clouseau could handle it. Hell, Frank Drebin or Harry Crumb could put this together! God dammit, George. Here's hoping Disney takes that line out in a subsequent release. (Or better yet, just gives us the unmolested originals again with a bit of cleanup.) Original review, 3/25/22: Another fun coincidence: I finished the last 10 pages of this tonight (and it's tax season, so getting 10 pages done in one sitting without fading out is above and beyond expectations). When I finished, I turned on the TV, and lo and behold, The Empire Strikes Back is on. Not only that, it was at the exact part where I started reading which was Luke getting sucked into that shaft in Cloud City. I mean, it wasn't off by a second. What does this have to do with anything? Nothing. I just felt like sharing it. I reckon the force is with me right now. 2.5 stars rounded up to three. The Empire Strikes Back is easily my favorite of all the Star Wars movies. None of the others even come close, though Rogue One is firmly in second place. The story itself is great, and has a nice twist at the end which everybody and their mother knows about by now, but I think a lot of my love for the movie is due to the production, the actors, the special effects, the directing, etc., and that's to say nothing of John Williams' kickass score. It was easier to see those reasons after reading the book and noticing the shortcomings in the story. The movie makes dramatic improvements with the subtlest changes. Most noticeable is the character of Han Solo. Harrison Ford gives him a dimension that's missing in the book. This actually occurs for almost all of the main cast. That doesn't mean the book characters were bad; just a bit different. In short, this book reads like a rough draft, and the movie is a much more polished version of the tale. Every single change was an improvement. Luke is less wimpy and whiny (and let's be real here; he's bad enough in the movies as it is), Vader is more menacing because he's more detached and doesn't feel the need to explain himself, Leia is more sure of herself and not at all like a milksop, and Han is more of a cockwagon, but one you want to root for regardless. Also, the love scenes in the movie come out sincere while in the book it's like they were directed by, well, George Lucas. (The best move Lucas ever made was letting somebody else direct this and Return of the Jedi, and we all say thankya.) And why the hell was Yoda blue? He's green, dammit! As for the writing... Well, frankly, it's not that good. It's not clunky in the same way as the first book, but still kind of rough. My biggest beef was that Mr. Glut often used synonyms where they weren't warranted and neglected to use them when they were. I found out later that he was primarily a screenwriter, and that he and George Lucas were classmates in college. Suddenly a lot of things started making sense. Star Wars was a surprise big deal after the first movie, but in 1980 it still wasn't the juggernaut it eventually became, and most people didn't give a rip about novelizations back then, so I can see why Lucas went with a novice for this book. Glut isn't terrible, but his inexperience shows here. If I recall from reading these 25 or so years ago, The Return of the Jedi was the best written of the original trilogy, though it also had the most changes. I reckon I'll find out later this year. And that's all I got. I should've been in bed at least a half hour ago. I was tired when I started this, but now I'm about to czonk out, and I think reading 10 pages and posting a review at all in the same night at this time of year after working 19 9-12 hour days straight and looking at another 20 some more is above and beyond the call of duty. Does anybody really know what day it is? Does anybody really care? I didn't think so. I probably should've saved this for later, but what choice did I have? I ain't gonna remember reading this, or even what my name is, four weeks from now. (Next day update: It looks like Luke Skywalker isn't the only whiny, little bitch in this review. Sheesh! Cut me some onions; I feel like crying.) One final thought. I reiterate what I said in my Star Wars review. This is a good read for academic, comparison reasons, but just watch the movie instead if you want the story. Only novelization nuts need apply here. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ ...more |
Notes are private!
|
2
|
Mar 04, 2022
Jan 10, 1996
|
Mar 25, 2022
Jan 15, 1996
|
Jan 01, 2022
|
Hardcover
| ||||||||||||||
| 067103264X
| 9780671032647
| 067103264X
| 3.96
| 24,869
| Feb 1999
| Feb 01, 1999
|
liked it
|
3.5 stars rounded up to four... Though I'm not sure it deserves the round-up... I think I'll do it differently this time. 3.49 rounded down to three. T 3.5 stars rounded up to four... Though I'm not sure it deserves the round-up... I think I'll do it differently this time. 3.49 rounded down to three. This is not a novel, but a screenplay. I generally don't like reading plays, and feel kind of the same way about screenplays, so I omitted this from my "read all the fiction Stephen King has put out" project. However, after enjoying the miniature screenplay "Sorry, Right Number" from Nightmares and Dreamscapes so much, I decided to give this a shot. I guess I'm glad I did, but I still like the movie (or miniseries) more, and since 95+% of the movie follows this line-for-line, I'd suggest just watching it instead. The movie is actually one of my favorites. Not just for SK movies, but for any movie. I give the screenplay three stars, but the movie is five+ stars all the way, no question. In my early 20s, I used to go through phases where I would watch the same movie every single night for a few weeks or a month or more, and this one was in the rotation. This is no mean feat considering it's about four hours long, but there was lots of alcohol involved back then, and I used to stay up into the wee hours, unless I passed out. Actually, I often passed out and came to with the title screen running over and over, but I digress. In spite of all that, I pretty much have this mostly memorized, and I still watch it about once a year, normally on a night when there's a snowstorm going on which really is the best way to do it. If this isn't high praise, then I don't know what is. This book answered a couple of questions I had about the movie because King gives us insight into a character's motivation from time to time. I assume this was so the director/actor would know how to wear a certain facial expression, or something. I have also always wondered why every child on the island was about four years old except Davey Hopewell who was about 14 or so. Was there a major fuckfest orgy on Little Tall in 1985? Did Linoge do a flyover then and cast an ovulation spell? What gives? Well, it turns out all the school-age kids were at school on the mainland when the storm hit, and were therefore stuck there. I guess it's possible this was explained in a brief throwaway line that I've missed every time, but I don't know. It's mentioned only twice in the book, and one of those wasn't a line of dialogue so there's no way the viewer could know anything about it. As for Davey being there, turns out he was recovering from mono, though he seems to be fully healed judging by the way he was dribbling his basketball up the street when he found the door to Martha's house open. Still, it's nice to have that question put to rest. And if any of the parents on the island didn't seem the least bit worried about their kids stuck on the mainland, well, I guess we can give them a break because they certainly had plenty of other things on their mind. Any changes between the screenplay and the finished product were minimal, and I think they improved the story. The biggest difference I noticed was in the final couple of scenes. Different characters deliver certain lines, and several are omitted. I guess this was due to time constraints, and possibly because the people delivering the lines weren't quite true to character, and it made more sense to give them to someone else. One change I do wish he would've made, though, is the lyrics to "I'm a Little Teapot." They're wrong. I've never heard his version which goes: I'm a little teapot, short and stout; Here is my handle, here is my spout. You can pick me up and pour me out; I'm a little teapot short and stout. It should be: I'm a little teapot, short and stout; Here is my handle, here is my spout. When I get all steamed up, hear me shout; Tip me over and pour me out. Even the internet agrees with me on this. It can't possibly be a copyright issue. This reads like a rough draft, and I guess that's what a screenplay really is. There were a few (very few) typos and several editing issues that I'm certain would've been taken care of had this been a novel and King went through his usual routine. We also see several of King's thoughts or ideas like he was sketching out possibilities and leaving it open for the director to make the final call. This kind of thing would never be in a novel or short story. It was also clear that he was addressing the movie makers directly in a few instances, or just giving them a witty quip. None of this shows up in the finished movie. As for the story itself, it is fantastic. Like I said, it's a favorite movie. I was pretty much watching the movie play out in my head as I read, and it was fun, but I have no idea what kind of experience someone would have with this if they haven't already seen the film. I imagine it would be annoying given the issues I mentioned above. But this thing still makes me so mad I could chew nails and spit out staples. After I don't know how many hundreds of viewings, I still HATE the island residents by the end of this as much now as I did the first time I saw it. Except Mike, of course. He gets this onto my "favorite protagonists" shelf even though things go pretty badly for him. (view spoiler)[Hell, if I'd been in his shoes, I'd have left a small nuke on Little Tall set to go off two days after I departed. That'd show those gutless asshats. And they have the unmitigated temerity to be mad at him for being mad at them because they sold his son to Satan against his wishes! And they're upset with him for deserting them after they fucked him over. I mean, shit, the man stayed a whole 'nother six or seven months trying to make it work. My ass would've been out of there in six or seven seconds after they treated me like that. Ungrateful shitheads. (hide spoiler)] The phrase "no good deed goes unpunished" fully applies here. ARGH, I hate them so much. I actually kind of hate them from the git-go, but only kind of at first. They are the most obnoxious buncha nosy-ass stupidy-stoops. Get back, stay out of the way, and let the damn constable do his job! Anyway, the fact that this story still elicits that kind of reaction from me is a sign of a great yarn. And Andre Linoge! What a fantastic villain. He plays everyone like a harp from hell. Only once does it seem like something isn't going to go his way when one character just barely fights off his influence, but he gives his plan a tweak and turns it around posthaste so he's still running the game. Sometimes a story sucks when the power between the hero and villain is so unbalanced that there's no way for the weaker one to win, but in this one King pulls it off perfectly, though I admit that might be a matter of personal preference. This is a great tragedy, and I loved it. I think everyone should watch the movie in the dark on a snowy night when you have about four hours to kill. As for reading this rough draft, eh. Only super fanboys need apply; they'd probably enjoy it as much as I did, or even more if they don't have my hangup with plays/screenplays. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jan 15, 2022
|
Jan 18, 2022
|
Dec 26, 2021
|
Paperback
| ||||||||||||||
| 0345400771
| 9780345400772
| 0345400771
| 4.05
| 17,298
| Dec 05, 1976
| Sep 29, 1995
|
liked it
|
They say that children should be seen and not heard. Likewise, science fiction should be seen and not read. I haven't read a ton of sci-fi, but every
They say that children should be seen and not heard. Likewise, science fiction should be seen and not read. I haven't read a ton of sci-fi, but every time I read a story that has a corresponding movie, the movie wins every time. I enjoyed reading this, but not because it's great literature (it isn't, not by a long shot, though the chapter at the end concerning the fight over the Death Star was fantastic). George Lucas supposedly wrote this, but it was actually done by ghost writer Alan Dean Foster. When asked if it was hard for him to see Lucas get all the credit for it, Foster said "Not at all. It was George's story idea. I was merely expanding upon it. Not having my name on the cover didn't bother me in the least. It would be akin to a contractor demanding to have his name on a Frank Lloyd Wright house." In the introduction to the edition I have, Lucas credited Foster for writing the book even though Lucas' name is still on the cover. I don't think it's a matter of each being magnanimous enough to give credit where credit is due, but rather trying to pass the blame because this really isn't that good. The story is the same, and the story is great; I love it just as much now as I did when I was a wee tot. But the writing... It gets a little rough. Lucas and Foster were both in their early 30's when it came out, so maybe we can blame their youth. I'm not sure who gets credit for the clunkiness; it could be both. The action was constantly interrupted with brief side phrases, and awkward similes, and those always took me out of the story. It's not that they were bad similes, but they were poorly placed. E.g.: An X-wing is bearing down on something, ready to fire. There's a TIE fighter on its tail (insert simile here), getting ready to fire. Will it hit its mark? Some people like that kind of thing, but I don't. I think when the action is intense, the scene should play out without an off topic reference popping up in your face. I bitch about that a lot in my Sleeping Beauties review, actually. Oh Gods, will I ever recover from that book? It doesn't look like it. No, my enjoyment for this particular book is mostly an academic interest. This book came out a few months before the movie was released. Sales were minimal, and everyone thought the movie would fare about the same. George Lucas was hoping to make just enough to be able to make a sequel. Well, we all know what happened. Star Wars exploded and exceeded everyone's wildest hopes and dreams. I think it's safe to say it will never go away, and the impact it's had on pop culture can't be overstated. The book was rereleased as a movie tie-in, and did much better the second time around. Side story (Foster and Lucas aren't the only ones who can interrupt with fiddle-faddle). My college music professor and his wife were in New York City when Star Wars came out. While riding in a taxi, they passed a line of people waiting outside a building, and the line wrapped around the corner. They asked the taxi driver what those people might be lining up for, and he told them "Oh, they're waiting to see that new robot movie," meaning Star Wars. The idea that it was once referred to as "that robot movie" tickles me. Everybody in the developed world, and most in the undeveloped world, know what the Star Wars franchise is. They might not know anything about it (such as one of my grandmothers), but they've at least heard of it. What interests me most are the changes that happened between this book, which I assume was based on the original, pre-production screenplay, and the movie, and then with the subsequent movies. There were a lot of subtle changes with some of the characters in both how they behaved and how they looked. Darth Vader force floats a cup of coffee to himself and takes a drink during the meeting with the Death Star staff before he chokes Admiral Motti (named Romodi in the book), which couldn't possibly happen with the final design of his costume unless he took off his mask. Parts of the Storm Troopers' faces are exposed also. Jabba is a fat man instead of a giant slug. (There's actually footage of this that wasn't used in the original movie, but it was reinserted with the special edition, and a CGI Jabba was pasted on top of him.) R2 looks quite different, and has arms that can perform tasks instead of just the spindly things that pop out of him. The Emperor is not a Sith Lord, but a puppet of some other Senators. Vader is not the only Dark Lord in the Empire. Luke is not in the red squadron at the end, but the blue. Well, you get the idea. I just think reading the original plan is kind of neat, though I'm 100% in support of the changes. All the changes that made it to the movie make the story better, and the evolution from the first movie to the second are even better. We see the real Vader in The Empire Strikes Back, and some of the changes from the first movie have to be creatively explained away, such as why he kinda/sorta took orders from Tarkin, or was on equal footing with him. It's clear after this movie that Vader takes orders from nobody but the Emperor. There were also Earthly references that made me think that maybe this story takes place in this galaxy right here instead of one far, far away. Obi-Wan mentions a duck, and Luke asks him what a duck is. Luke also thinks about a dog he once owned. Having seen all the movies, some of the TV shows and comics, and having read a few of the books, I've seen many creatures in the Star Wars universe, but I've never seen a dog or a duck. I suppose they could exist, though. This book/movie also has the biggest coulda/shoulda/woulda moment in that galaxy far, far away which plays out between Captain Bolvan and Lieutenant Hija. [image] Bolvan ordered Hija to hold his fire on the escape pod which had no life forms in it. A total of half a page is dedicated to the exchange, but it's the keystone to the entire conflict. We know that the pod had the droids with the Death Star plans aboard, and if it had been destroyed, that would've been the end of the whole thing. The Death Star would not have been destroyed. Luke's training as a Jedi would probably have been delayed since he'd still be helping uncle Owen on his farm for another season or two. Leia would've been executed. The rebels would likely have been found and destroyed during that period. Han and Leia would never have met, so that would mean no Kylo Ren in later years, but you really wouldn't need him since the Emperor, Vader, and the Empire would still be around, and everyone in the First Order would just be a part of that instead. Yoda would probably have died alone on Dagobah, though I suppose he, Obi-Wan, and Luke would've met at some point and started a new resistance. We're not told what happened to Bolvan once Vader found out he ordered Hija to stand down, but it doesn't require a lot of imagination to figure it out if you know anything about Vader's MO in dealing with such blunders. Like I said before, I enjoyed reading this, but not as much as when I read it in high school 25+ years ago, and I don't reckon I'll ever need to read it again. I'll Final thought: Just watch the movie instead; the book adds nothing that the movie hasn't improved. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
2
|
Nov 12, 2021
Jan 05, 1996
|
Nov 21, 2021
Jan 10, 1996
|
Nov 12, 2021
|
Hardcover
| ||||||||||||||
| 1947808060
| 9781947808065
| 1947808060
| 4.02
| 313
| Sep 01, 2018
| May 18, 2021
|
liked it
|
This manga reading thing is an experiment on my part, trying something new, getting out of the comfort zone, and all that jazz. This is my second one
This manga reading thing is an experiment on my part, trying something new, getting out of the comfort zone, and all that jazz. This is my second one (the first was Les Miserables). I also have Great Expectations waiting in the wings, but I think once I read that one I can retire from the manga reading field and be just fine. There's nothing wrong with them, but I don't see anything to write home about either. I guess I'm just apathetic with them. This is strange since I love comic books, and I also love these three classic stories I'm reading, but I reckon in the end I just prefer the original books. That's not to say these are bad; I just don't think they're for me. I didn't enjoy this one as much as Les Miserables. Dracula is an epistolary deal and the manga also follows that format. I don't know if that works in the genre's favor, but I also don't know that it doesn't... Hell, it looks like I don't know a damn thing so far. This is fine if you want to experience the story quickly but don't have time to dedicate to the real book. It follows it pretty closely, leaving out a few minor parts here and there. It would be a good introduction to anyone who's unsure about tackling the original, but the writing in the original is what makes it worth reading. Something is missing in the manga even if it does add some pretty sweet pictures. Several of the characters didn't look the way I've always envisioned them in my head (thanks Hollywood), but I got over that pretty quickly. I've also seen so many movie adaptations that I was mixing them up with the book, and it was nice to revisit the original story. In summation, I enjoyed reading this but felt like something was lacking. Maybe this is best for people who haven't read the original, but a lot of them might think this was a little dull due to the epistolary format. I don't know. Check it out for yourself, and you be the judge. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Oct 12, 2022
|
Oct 19, 2022
|
Jan 22, 2021
|
Paperback
| ||||||||||||||
| 1927925169
| 9781927925164
| 1927925169
| 4.11
| 7,792
| May 01, 2014
| Aug 01, 2014
|
really liked it
|
Warning: Current event political content ahead. The review is clearly marked below if you want to skip to it. How coincidental that I should be doing t Warning: Current event political content ahead. The review is clearly marked below if you want to skip to it. How coincidental that I should be doing this review today, 1/6/21, the day the U.S. Capitol was stormed. It's mid-afternoon as I write this, and I'm not going to put a running commentary of events here as it plays out, though I am going to run my mouth for a bit. The timing is coincidental because a major part of this book concerns the attempted revolution of 1832 in Paris which came on the heels of a period of economic hardship, a cholera outbreak which killed many, and a regime change. There is nothing new under the sun, and I'm sure you can see the parallels. This kind of thing happens all the time throughout history, though most people either forget about other incidents or never learned about them in the first place. I've been saying for 10 or 15 years that there is a revolution coming to the US. I didn't know which side was going to start it, or how it would play out, or how violent it would be, or if it would be violent at all, just that it was coming. Is this the start? I have no idea. I just know we passed a point of no return the week after the 2020 election when several oddities occurred, and the powers that be not only refused to even look into them, but also pooh-poohed it and told everyone "Tilly-vally, that's all poppycock. Nothing to see here, go on about your business." (That's a paraphrase, not verbatim.) But they say where there's smoke, there's fire, and an awful lot of smoke has needed to be explained away. The elites/establishment/deep-state (just pick your term of choice) essentially told 75+ million people "fuck you," and that isn't ever going to end well. The left was always going to [image] "Awww, you used a movie quote, lulz. Sorry, can't take you seriously. Your entire argument is now invalid." Well, I'm an ignorant deplorable. Were you ever going to take me seriously? I didn't think so. Might as well have fun with my rant by adding pictures. Anyway, something most people (especially in the media and the government) fail to understand is that this is not about left versus right anymore because the corruption runs rampant in both parties. This is about the elites (people in power for whom rules and laws don't seem to apply) versus the common man (you and me whether you like to admit it or not). And all the while they are telling us that they have our best interests at heart. [image] Yep. We're too stupid to know what's best for us. And do as I say, not as I do. That kind of thing was behind the French Revolution which doesn't factor into this book though most people think it does. (It's easy to confuse that and some of the later minor revolutions if you don't study history.) And you know, this is probably a good place to segue to the review before I get completely bent out of shape. REVIEW STARTS HERE: 3.5 stars rounded up to four... I think. Or maybe a real four. Hell, I don't know. Maybe I'll have a better idea by the time I finish typing. I'm not quite sure what to make of this. This is the first manga I've ever read. I'd been interested in checking them out for a while so I can see what the kids like about them so much, but I couldn't bring myself to give the ones they had more than a cursory glance. Ditto the ones I saw at the book store; they were just too weird, and I found I didn't really care about them, even the Transformers ones I found. Part of it is the anime style artwork. It's fine. Excellent, in fact, but I guess I just prefer a different kind. I loved Dragonball Z when I was in college, and that's the same style, so I'm not sure if I'm looking for something to bitch about or if this really is a personal hangup. I discovered some classic books I love were given the manga treatment, so I put them on my Christmas list, and here we are with this one. I'd like to check out a couple others, but at 18 bucks a pop (or about $16 with my discount) for something I can read in a couple of hours... I don't know. I think I'd end up with a bad case of buyer's remorse, even if I used my B&N gift cards which would easily cover it. I mean, I'm pretty damn cheap, and such a purchase could cause an ulcer. But this isn't goodfinances, it's goodreads, and I better try to get back to something relevant. I love this book. (The real book, I mean.) I've read it only once, but it's always stuck with me. I also love the musical and like a couple of movie adaptations. (The movie based on the musical can eat a bag of dicks, though. Goddam Russell Crowe. Why don't they hire people who can sing if they're going to put them in a musical?) Anyway, this is speed Les Miserables lite. I noticed several missing scenes, but that's to be expected when condensing a gazillion page novel down to 325 pages. The parts that were missing could be lost without affecting the plot, though, so that was good, but a couple were memorable scenes. For example, the adapters included Valjean hiding in a coffin but didn't show the part where he was accidentally buried for a little bit. The action moves a lot quicker in the manga, but given how verbose Hugo was, it's impossible to imagine it going any slower in any adaptation. I like how a picture says a thousand words, because that came in handy here. But sometimes I wondered if someone who wasn't familiar with the story already could possibly follow what was going on since some details were cut out and everything moved so fast. I imagine connecting point A to point B would be difficult at times without some foreknowledge. I might encourage one of my nieces to read this so she can tell me whether or not she understood the story. So, there you go. I still don't know what to make of this. Fantastic artwork that's not really my favorite style. Awesome, albeit condensed, story. There are a lot of factors working against each other here. If you like Manga and like this story, and don't mind a major abridgement, then you'd love this. It was a fun read, but mostly because it reminded me of the real book which is a fave. It was cool to be able to relive the story in a couple of hours and not have to dedicate weeks of my life to it. But that's like enjoying Prego spaghetti instead of the homemade, cook-it-for-three-days, smack-your-mama-it's-so-good real deal. Well, this didn't help at all. I still can't decide if this is 3.5 or four stars. Oh well. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jan 04, 2021
|
Jan 05, 2021
|
Dec 26, 2020
|
Paperback
| ||||||||||||||
| B00EV4KRSG
| 4.00
| 11
| Jun 1994
| Jun 01, 1994
|
really liked it
|
Part of my comic book reread project. Continued from Bizarro's World. I'm using this issue to stand in for the entire "Battle for Metropolis" and "Fall Part of my comic book reread project. Continued from Bizarro's World. I'm using this issue to stand in for the entire "Battle for Metropolis" and "Fall of Metropolis" stories which span nine books. I was surprised to see that it doesn't have its own trade paperback because I love this. Then I realized that as a standalone, it would kind of suck. This is the climax of several storylines that have been brewing for three or four years, and it's kind of like the season finale of a primetime soap. If you haven't been reading the titles regularly for the past few years, you would have no clue what the hell was going on in this or who half of the characters are. But before we get to that, what has happened since "Bizarro's World?" I also read the Supergirl miniseries which came out around the time all this is taking place. I normally don't insert side stories from other characters, but this related to everything going on in Superman's stories. She discovers her boyfriend and love of her life, Lex Luthor, has just been lying and using her, and she goes apeshit on him. Luthor's disease progresses (since he's a clone of his supposedly dead "father" with said "father's" brain in the clone's body and is affected by the clone plague), and he gets weaker and weaker, but he still tries to find a cure and run Metropolis. Lois Lane has discovered Lex's secrets (that he's a clone, and that he attempted to murder one of his employees), and continues gathering evidence. The Underworlders, who are all clones, are also sickening and dying in droves. They believe the Cadmus Project is responsible (and they're correct in this supposition, though not in the way they think), and decide to wage war on them. Lex wants to destroy Cadmus as well for the same reasons, and provides the Underworlders with weapons. Meanwhile, Superman's powers are continuing to run out of control to the point that the slightest move he makes causes him to fly off into a building and knock it over. He and Cadmus try to use the Parasite to siphon off the excess energy... [image] ...and it goes about how you'd expect: Parasite gets too powerful and escapes, but the scheme does work, and Superman is back to his regular power. They fight for a bit, then Parasite inexplicably disappears after he knocks Supes socks off. He could totally wipe out Superman now, but decides to vamoose. And that brings us to "The Battle for Metropolis/Fall of Metropolis." (view spoiler)[Lois writes an expose on Lex, but since all the Daily Planet computers were made by Lexcorp, Lex can spy on everything they're used for, sees the story, and changes it to something so ridiculous that Lois Lane loses all her credibility, not to mention her job. Then all her credit cards are maxed out, bank accounts drained, evidence points to her being an embezzler, and her apartment is blown up. In short, Lex ruins her, but she gets back at him with the help of someone at Lexcorp (amusingly named "Deep Quote") who has been feeding her information. This turns out to be Lex's physician and closest confidant, Dr. Gretchen Kelley. She had a thing for Lex, Sr., and posed as Jr.'s mother so Lex could keep his empire. Kelley turns herself over to the authorities, and soon everyone knows Lex for the cad that he is. To my knowledge, that's the last we ever hear about her, and we can assume she spends the rest of her life in prison, because she was a part of some pretty heinous deeds. Cadmus and Lex's soldiers start fighting, then the Underworlders show up and start fighting. Much of the supporting cast for the past few years die, and unlike the main heroes and villains in comic books, they die forever. Particularly rough was Charlie (one of the friends of Underworld), and Myra, the lady who ran the orphanage and was in charge of Keith, but we all know that Keith... well, that comes later. Oh, and this is where Professor Hamilton loses his arm, but he's a scientific genius and simply makes a new one. Happersen, Lex's top scientist and one of the only people who knows he's a clone, is killed in this, but he unleashes Lex's fail-safes as his final act which end up destroying the city. They had been put in place as a defense mechanism after the destruction of Coast City in case aliens took over Metropolis. But Lex is so petty, selfish, and bitter that he decides if he's going to die, he's going to take his city and everyone in it with him, and this shows him at his worst. No wonder I love him as a villain! He starts to change his mind at the last second when it's pointed out to him that his legacy will be that of a monster, but that's when Happersen does his thing, and Lex kills him for his trouble. Soon Metropolis is pretty much in ruins with only the Newstime building left standing, and that's only because the magazine's publisher, Colin Thornton, is actually Lord Satanus in disguise and used his power to protect it. Everything else came tumbling down. It was rough watching the Daily Planet globe fall. It was also a little rougher reading all that this time since September 11th, 2001 brings such scenes closer to home now. (This story was done in 1994.) Westfield, the director of Cadmus and a real shithead, also gets his in this. Dabney Donovan (the mad scientist who made all the Underworlders, and whom everyone assumes has been dead for ages), gets him. He also takes Westfield's ear with him so Westfield can listen to his taunts and bragging about how he got his just deserts, and anything else Donovan feels like telling him... Yeah, he's a nut. Luthor's body shuts down completely; he can't even open and close his eyes, but his brain is still fully functional and he's just a prisoner in his shell. The final fail-safe is a Kryptonian Warsuit which found Luthor, picked him up, plugged into his brain, and allowed him to fight Superman in Action Comics 701. The warsuit is the one that brought Superman back from the fortress of solitude after his death, and Lex acquired it and made some alterations. (It's also purple and green which is a nice nod to the Bronze Age Luthor warsuit, though this one is nowhere near as gay.) They have a knockdown, dragout from which Supes emerges the victor, and Lex is confined to another machine to live out his years in a body that doesn't work. A cure for the disease was discovered, but it was administered too late to reverse the process for Luthor, though it did stop the degeneration. Sucks for him, but of course we all know... Well, once again, that will have to wait, and wait quite a while for a major villain if I recall correctly, even by comic book standards. I think it was over a year. Reckon I'll find out soon. (hide spoiler)] There was also a tie-in with the DC intercompany crossover series Worlds Collide going on during all of this, but who cares about that? Two of the issues delve into it, and I didn't know what was going on since I didn't collect the other titles related to it, but it was easy enough to gloss over. It's kind of meta, and the premise looked really cool. Apparently Metropolis, Superman, and several other heroes are twinners for some other city and people in another dimension, and are even works of fiction in that universe, but the two meet when one guy who exists in both places, (in the Metropolis world when he's awake here but asleep there, and vice versa when asleep here but awake there) has some kind of meltdown or something, and there's the basis for the story. I dug what was going on, but not enough to try to find out anything else about it. Sorry. "The Battle for Metropolis" alone would get five stars because that's where all the stuff about the secondary characters happen, but the second half comprising "The Fall of Metropolis" gets a little weak at times, so four stars for the whole shebang. As for the ads, I was right in my "Bizarro's World" review; they're getting kind of lame. There were a couple of movie ads, some order forms for other comic books, but most of the ads were for other comic books and stories going on elsewhere in the DC universe, and that's no fun. Maybe they instituted a policy to quit scamming gullible children? Anyway, one of the comic book ads was also pretty tricksy-wicksy. [image] This is also the book cover, I think. You'd think it was a novelization of the TV show, which would probably suck, but it's not. It's a collection of superman comics that inspired some of the TV episodes. In short, it's a trade paperback of some existing comic book stories. It has nothing at all to do with the Dean Cain/Teri Hatcher incarnations of the franchise. Still, I loved that show during its original run, and it was fun to reminisce about it for a minute. Next checkpoint: Superman/Doomsday: Hunter/Prey. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Nov 04, 2020
|
Nov 07, 2020
|
Oct 24, 2020
|
Kindle Edition
| ||||||||||||||||
| 1563892014
| 9781563892011
| 1563892014
| 3.70
| 391
| 1994
| Nov 01, 1995
|
really liked it
|
Part of my comic book reread project. Continued from Action Comics #700 (Battle for/Fall of Metropolis). 4.5 stars rounded down to four. This is a side Part of my comic book reread project. Continued from Action Comics #700 (Battle for/Fall of Metropolis). 4.5 stars rounded down to four. This is a side story outside the regular run of Superman titles, but fits in about here. Doomsday got tied to an asteroid and tossed into outer space by the Cyborg in Return of Superman, and here's where we finally find out what became of him. A ship takes the asteroid on board to check it out. The pilots discover Doomsday on the thing and are all like "Aw hells to the naw, get that shit outta here," but by then it's too late. Doomsday busts out, acts a fool, kills every damn thing, and the autopilot flies him off to Apokolips where he continues his rampage. Apparently he's known as the Armageddon Creature throughout the universe because he had been several places before landing on Earth. While Doomsday is tearing up everything, the Cyborg emerges from a technological horcrux he had attached to Doomsday, and he starts melding with Apokolips technology in an attempt to create a new Warworld. Superman gets wind of all this, and beats feet (figuratively) to Apokolips to face his greatest foe who has already damn near killed Darkseid... [image] ...though he kind of deserves getting killed, no matter how it happens. It's not because he's all mean and shit, and kills millions of people himself; it's the Goddam kinky boots. STOP THAT! Anyway, Doomsday gets teleported away to Calaton, Superman takes care of the Cyborg, and Waverider shows up and gives Supes the skinny on how Doomsday came to be. Doomsday's origin is the best part of the story, and it's the main reason I take it so close to five stars. (view spoiler)[He started out as a baby (like most people, I reckon), and was part of an experiment on Krypton way before the Kryptonians were the advanced civilization we all know and love. The elements were harsh at that time, and there were powerful beasts roaming the land. Baby was just chucked out of the lab into this environment and immediately killed. The scientists collected what they could of it, brought it back inside, grew a clone baby from the material, then chucked it back outside again where the same thing happened. On through the years this conduct continued, and eventually the baby could survive the atmosphere. Later he could hide from the monsters longer. He went from living for a couple of seconds to living for hours before he was killed. Then came the day when he could fight and best the beasts, and he became the Doomsday we know. Such treatment didn't exactly help him form a loving bond with his creators, so he busted in, killed them all in a rage, and took a ship off planet to start his rampage across the stars. He eventually landed on Calaton where The Radiant killed him. He was encased in a metal casket of sorts, and thrown into space. But Doomsday's creation made him unkillable. If he dies, he is soon resurrected since such is in his genetic makeup, and he also evolves past whatever/whoever killed him in the past. The sarcophagus landed on Earth a long time ago, Doomsday eventually escaped, and we have the events found in The Death of Superman. (hide spoiler)] Later, Superman finds Doomsday again, realizes he can't win, and he and Waverider take him to the one point in time where he can be destroyed forever, and... well, you can read it for yourself. After this, there are a couple of regular Superman titles left before we get to the "Zero Hour" story linked below. He simply fights Massacre and Bloodsport in demolished Metropolis in those, and they're both pretty good. Any 90's Superman fan would enjoy this, so check it out. Next checkpoint: Superman: Zero Hour. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Nov 07, 2020
|
Nov 09, 2020
|
Oct 12, 2020
|
Paperback
| ||||||||||||||
| 1852865156
| 9781852865153
| 1852865156
| 4.11
| 21,147
| Sep 01, 1993
| 1993
|
it was amazing
|
Part of my Batman comic book reread project. Continued from Knightfall: Prelude. CAUTION: Spoilers abound in this, and I'm not hiding them this time. So Part of my Batman comic book reread project. Continued from Knightfall: Prelude. CAUTION: Spoilers abound in this, and I'm not hiding them this time. Solid five stars. Is this my favorite Batman story? I don't know, but it's a distinct possibility. I've read it several times, and enjoyed it just as much this time as I did when I first read it in high school. But I have another six years worth of issues to read, and I don't remember a lot of the later ones, so I guess the jury will have to be out on that for a while. But I might've actually liked this even more this time since I could hear The Dark Knight Rises's Tom Hardy's voice as Bane. I always assumed he was Hispanic since he throws out a Spanish word every now and then, and I think his minions call him Jefe a couple of times. I could never get a Spanish accent to work in my head, but Tom Hardy's interpretation came pretty easily. Well, this is the one. The story with one of the most famous images in comic book history: the picture where Batman gets his back broken. [image] It created quite a stir, and I don't mean in the comic book world. This shit was on the 6:00 news. I remember seeing the report, and it was discussed by the talking heads for a couple of days. The main question was "are comic books getting too violent for children?" DC had just killed Superman the year before, and was breaking Batman's back going too far? As usual, nothing really came of it, but parent groups sure had a fun time bitching about it for a while. This story was also the basis for the movie The Dark Knight Rises, though Bane's motives are a little different. He wants to run Gotham in this whereas he wants to nuke it off the face of the Earth in the film. In both cases he needs to destroy Batman in order to pull it off, and he does this with the same technique my chiropractor used to try to get me put back together: a knee in the sacroiliac, though my chiro was trying to remove a click-clack, and Bane was trying to introduce one. The final fight between Bane and Batman is fine, though at that point Batman could've been bested by Don Quixote. It's the run-up to it that makes this story great. Batman is going through some kind of midlife crisis, and he's sick and already exhausted. Then Bane causes a breakout at Arkham asylum just to weaken Batman further. As Batman gets worn down, Bane and friends monitor. At the right moment, Bane, who has discovered that Batman is also Bruce Wayne, meets him at Wayne manor and simply beats the hell out of him. [image] Batman tries to fight back because that's just how he is, but after weeks of mental and physical torment, he simply has nothing left. [image] Shee-it, I think I could've withstood that blow. Bane didn't even need his venom (which makes him super strong) for this, but he used it anyway. I believe Batman could've taken Bane in an even fight, even with him amped-up on the juice, but Bane isn't interested in a fair fight. He's interested in abject humiliation at every level, which he almost achieves; Batman never gives up, so his spirit isn't really broken, but it's a close thing. The other villains and their schemes which lead up to the final confrontation are pretty fun. Normally they'd be nothing to write home about, especially the Firefly arc, but seeing the toll they take on Batman is what makes the story more interesting. Then there are the ones that are worth writing home about, such as the Ventriloquist's search for Scarface (I know the Ventriloquist is supposed to be lame as hell, and he is, but I still think he's a scream). And the Joker and Scarecrow teaming up, kidnapping the mayor, and using fear gas to force him to cause more chaos with ridiculous orders and edicts. I know such behavior is common practice for governors and mayors in 2020, but in 1993, watching your city burn, doing nothing to stop it, and in fact helping to run it into the ground was a novelty. Batman goes further than usual when he gives the Joker his beatdown, and who knows what would've happened if they didn't start a trap that would've killed the mayor, forcing Batman to rescue him instead. Basically years of pent up anger at Jason Todd's murder finally came out, and Batman was too mentally fatigued to stop himself from losing control. All of this is great reading. As usual, trade paperbacks that collect several issues aren't meant to be complete stories. There are events that went on before that will be mentioned, and foreshadowing of events to come that won't be resolved. There is also ongoing soap-opera stuff, such as Bruce's relationship with Dr. Kinsolving. Somebody approaching this for the first time will see things to make him go "What the hell was that all about?" However, they're minimal, and I think people can follow along easily enough if they're diving in for the first time. Next checkpoint: Knightfall: Part Two ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Nov 09, 2020
|
Nov 20, 2020
|
Oct 03, 2020
|
Paperback
| ||||||||||||||
| 1401216676
| 9781401216672
| B01M01SP8Z
| 4.37
| 225,921
| Nov 16, 1988
| Mar 19, 2008
|
really liked it
|
The second part of my Batman comic book reread project. This was good... and a little strange. I think my expectations were too high, though, so I was The second part of my Batman comic book reread project. This was good... and a little strange. I think my expectations were too high, though, so I was a little disappointed. I'd heard about how good it was, everyone has good things to say about it, and I considered buying it for ages, but never could justify spending $18.00 for it at the bookstore. Luckily a used copy online was much cheaper, and I finally made it happen. The artwork was A+ all the way, but I'm more interested in the stories in comic books than the art, and this one left a little to be desired. Don't get me wrong, it wasn't bad by any stretch, but it just didn't live up to the hype. Isn't this supposed to be the end all/be all? The cat's meow? The bee's knees? That's what I was led to believe, and it didn't quite deliver. There are a couple of other Batman stories I think were better. Really, I ought to be ashamed of myself. I call myself a Batman fan, and it took me waaaaaaay too long to get around to this. If I had read it earlier, I would've easily identified some other Batman links. I've played all the way through the Lego Batman video game over half a dozen times in the past 12 years, and I never knew that the part where the Joker kidnaps Commissioner Gordon and imprisons him in a carnival is taken straight from here. I still haven't seen the new Joker movie with Joaquin Phoenix, but I'm aware of it, and I'm willing to bet that parts of his origin story are also taken from this book. The movie is on the "to-get-to-one-day" list, but watching movies is complicated with my living situation. Plus, I'd rather be reading, so it's not a huge priority. There are many different kinds of Jokers, or rather he changes through the years. This shows him at his most sadistic. He's trying to break Commissioner Gordon and show that anyone can go insane if pushed to the brink. Of course, he fails at this. He did a much better job on Harvey Dent in the second Nolan Batman movie. [image] He pushed Gordon pretty damn hard in this, and didn't quite pull it off (I don't consider this a spoiler because everyone knows Gordon is around forever after this). But I sure did enjoy watching him try. Well, that might not be the best way to put it. It's kind of sick. But I enjoyed the story, even if the characterization for Gordon seemed a little off. The version of this I have includes an introduction, and the people who made this are pretty impressed with themselves. I reckon they have a right to be; it is really good. But again, it didn't live up to the hype for me. At the end of this there's another short story about the "Innocent Man." I'm not sure why it was included as it had nothing at all to do with the main Joker story, and I didn't think it was all that great. It got into the mind of a psychopath, but was too short to be fully developed. I don't know; I just thought it was weird that it was tacked onto the end. In spite of my gripes, I think any Batman/Joker fan should read this. I liked it in spite of its shortcomings. Next checkpoint: A Death in the Family ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Aug 04, 2020
|
Aug 04, 2020
|
Jul 26, 2020
|
Hardcover
| ||||||||||||||
| 0930289447
| 4.08
| 32,430
| Nov 01, 1988
| 1988
|
really liked it
|
Part of my Batman comic book reread project. Continued from The Killing Joke. I think I borrowed this from someone about 25 years ago and never gave it Part of my Batman comic book reread project. Continued from The Killing Joke. I think I borrowed this from someone about 25 years ago and never gave it back to him. I don't even remember his name. And what's worse is that I knew him from church. That's it, I'm going to hell. Either that or Batman's going to come get me and put me in Blackgate penitentiary. Jason Todd was the second, and least liked, Robin between Dick Grayson and the inimitable Tim Drake. I don't have much of an opinion either way because the only other stories I have with him in it are the two in which he was introduced. The first one is where he's caught boosting the tires off the Batmobile. [image] And it's fun watching how times change. This is from June 1987. Jason is 12 years old, and there are a couple of scenes showing him smoking. [image] And even though Batman tells him it's a bad idea, I'm pretty sure that would never get past the editor in 2020. Batman takes Jason to a school for boys run by Ma Gunn in the next issue, and it turns out she's actually training criminals. [image] She smokes herself, but she apparently draws the line at weed. [image] Anyway, Jason helps Batman shut down Ma Gunn and her hoods on one of their capers, and Batman decides to take Jason home with him and train him to be the new Robin... even though he had just decided in the previous issue that having a kid with him was too dangerous for the kid because the prior Robin, Dick Grayson, had just gotten shot in the arm. At this point Dick decides to take his ball and glove and go home... or just go somewhere else and become Nightwing, or something. Fast forward a year or so in real life, and a few years in comic book life, and Jason Todd has become such an insufferable douche nozzle that the editors ran a reader poll to see if he would live or die, and that's what this story was all about. (Spoilers peppered throughout ahead). The Joker is at it again. Having escaped from Arkham Asylum for the 5,973rd time, and broke because the government has seized all his assets... [image] ...he decides to sell a cruise missile he has lying around to some terrorists for some cash. This doesn't go well for anyone since the Joker rigged the thing to blow up instead of launching (just for kicks, don't you understand), but the terrorists launch it too soon because Batman and Robin are cleaning their clocks. Unfortunately the Joker's money was still by the missile when it exploded, and he's once again broke. He escapes, and Batman and Robin resume their search for Robin's real mother which is why Robin was there in the first place. Batman was originally there looking for the Joker, but since the Joker seems to have pulled a disappearing act, he helps Robin. (There are a lot of super-coincidences in this thing, but that's okay in comic books and Dickensian literature.) Stuff happens and the dynamic duo run into Lady Shiva for bit. I mention this only because she's one of my favorite villains/anti-heroes. This story is firing on all cylinders with its bad guy cast. Meanwhile, the Joker has been in touch with Jason's real mother, and is involved in a plot to steal relief supplies from Ethiopia and sell them to other terrorists. He's also sending boxes rigged with his laughing gas for more shits and giggles to the people who are supposed to get the original shipment. [image] "Love that Joker!" Batman rushes to stop that shipment, and Robin, against orders and all common sense, goes into the camp to help his mother with the Joker. But it turns out the mother is a bitch. She turns him over to the Joker, and as you know, no good deed goes unpunished. [image] Mom just watches with maybe a slight wince, then lights up a cigarette. But, the Joker betrays her as well, and blows up both her and Robin. That brings us to the end of chapter four, then the readers get to take a hand in matters by... well, see for yourself. [image] Only fifty cents a pop. Do you remember 900 numbers? Remember long distance charges? Final score was 5,271 for life, 5,343 for death. 72 votes made the difference, but years later it came out that maybe one dude rigged his phone to call the "kill the bastard" number every couple of minutes, so it's possible Robin was supposed to live after all. Alas. Back to the story. After selling his ill-gotten medical supplies, the Joker is approached by none other than Ayatollah Khomeini. [image] The Joker's made Iran's ambassador to the UN, and is scheduled to make a speech there. Batman is told by top US officials not to interfere because the Joker now has diplomatic immunity, and they enlist Superman's aid to make sure Batman minds his P's and Q's, but he decides to go anyway as Bruce Wayne, and we get my favorite image in this book with Bruce and the Joker staring at each other for a few panels. [image] I don't know why I like that so much, I just do. So, now we have a known psychopathic, mass-murderer representing a terrorist country, and they're going to put him in a room with the top representatives from just about every other country in the world, countries that are enemies of Iran. But they must allow it because immunity, rules, appeasement, diplomacy, words, etc. What could possibly go wrong? And really, this is typical UN arrogant idiocy. I could see this kind of thing happening in real life. Of course the Joker tries to gas everyone, but Superman sucks it all up and carries it outside. Now that the Joker has broken the rules and tried to kill everybody, Batman is allowed to beat his ass. He does so, but the Joker escapes again leaving an explosion and a couple of bodies behind him, the end. This is a great story, but still getting only four stars, maybe 4.5. A couple of things are just too silly, such as how Jason found out about his three possible mothers. And the coincidences were just way too many and too convenient. That keeps it from a five. Since this was a trade paperback, there weren't any advertisements in it, but I'll drop one from the Jason Todd origin issues at the top. [image] What the... The girls are all... I mean... Aren't these things a scream?! Next checkpoint: Batman 443 ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jul 25, 2020
|
Jul 26, 2020
|
Jul 22, 2020
|
Paperback
| ||||||||||||||||
| 4.53
| 688,324
| 1954
| Oct 12, 2005
|
it was amazing
|
Another holding pen for serial reviews. Five solid stars for the series. I'm including The Hobbit since I count that as a prequel. The Hobbit ★★★★★ The Another holding pen for serial reviews. Five solid stars for the series. I'm including The Hobbit since I count that as a prequel. The Hobbit ★★★★★ The Fellowship of the Ring ★★★★✰ The Two Towers ★★★★✰ The Return of the King ★★★★★ ...more |
Notes are private!
|
2
|
Jul 06, 2018
not set
|
Jan 25, 2019
Jan 1991
|
Aug 09, 2019
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||||||
| 0786932171
| 9780786932177
| 0786932171
| 4.15
| 31,306
| 1986
| May 01, 2004
|
really liked it
|
I remembered almost nothing of this second installment of the Legends trilogy going into the reread which is kind of surprising because there were a c
I remembered almost nothing of this second installment of the Legends trilogy going into the reread which is kind of surprising because there were a couple of hardcore scenes. In fact, the only thing I clearly recalled when I got to it was when a dwarf shaved his beard, and that's so inconsequential when pit against everything else that I'm not sure why it stuck. Perhaps a psychologist is needed here. This earns a spot on my "favorite villains/antagonists" shelf due to Raistlin showing us just how cold he can get. By the end, even Tasslehoff, an insufferable eternal optimist, is having a difficult time finding anything nice to say about him. But is he truly a villain? Raistlin is so difficult to categorize. An argument can be made that he's a villain because he's certainly evil, but it just doesn't quite fit. He's definitely not a hero, and anti-hero is wrong also. Perhaps anti-villain? I was discussing this with a coworker, and he ran across a phrase that seems apt. Raistlin is evil fighting evil. He has the noble aspiration of defeating Takhisis, the goddess of evil, and then taking her place, though he doesn't care who dies (or who he has to flat out murder even if it's a friend or family member) along the way. Out of the two of them, Takhisis is worse, hands down, but would you rather live in Hitler's Europe, or Stalin's? This involved Raist's attempts to get to the portal that will get him into the abyss so he can fight Takhisis, and how a war was started, and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. But there was one part I didn't understand. Either I missed something while listening to it (which is quite possible), or there's a plot hole here you could drive the Bagger 288 through. (view spoiler)[Raistlin knows that a gnome operating a time travel device at the most inopportune time is supposed to cause a huge explosion and kill him while he's trying to get into the abyss. He finds this gnome with Tasslehoff, murders him, then takes the device. Several days later at the aforementioned inopportune time, Tasslehoff has this device, and is standing right in front of Raistlin with it preparing to use it with Caramon. Raist doesn't seem to care. Did he forget that the device is supposed to fuck up everything? Why does the device even still exist? Since you know it's supposed to ruin your life's ambition, why not destroy it? And how did Tasselhoff get it back? I clearly remember Raistlin taking it away, but do not recall it going back to Tas. Being a Kender, he could've slipped it out of Raist's pocket at some point, but I'm pretty sure that wasn't stated. (hide spoiler)] Somebody please fill me in if you have further information. This audiobook was another one done for the Library of Congress, and the reader (John Polk, I think) did fine, but the copy I had came from a friend who got it from Lord knows where, and it was substandard. I could deal with the occasional blips and skips just fine since they didn't happen too often and didn't last too long. They were quarter second skips, not whole minutes or anything. But... I got to within about five or so pages to the end, maybe less than 10 minutes worth of material, and then it was over. The ending was missing. But what do you expect when something is related, even in the remotest degree, to Congress? Luckily fantasy nerds are unscrupulous folks, and someone has posted the entire book online in PDF form, and I was able to finish it up... And now that I think about it, stand by... ...OK, I just reread a bit, and I can't find anything that mentions (view spoiler)[Tas getting the device back (hide spoiler)], so SUPER PLOT HOLE! Anyway, this book was good, fun, etc., but not as much as the first one. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
2
|
Oct 28, 2019
May 1994
|
Nov 08, 2019
May 31, 1994
|
Jul 18, 2019
|
Hardcover
| ||||||||||||||
| 0786927666
| 9780786927661
| 0786927666
| 4.34
| 2,549
| 1986
| Sep 03, 2002
|
really liked it
|
7/19/19: 15-year-old Pierce gives this series five stars. Time of the Twins: ★★★★★ War of the Twins: ★★★★✰ Test of the Twins: ★★★★✰ Final analysis, 11/21/19: My original surmisal was correct; Time of the Twins was/is my favorite Dragonlance novel, but that's explained in my review of that book. Also, this trilogy is better than the Chronicles, but they're both a lot fun. Everything I say in my review of that series (linked above) can pretty much be put here. As for the rating for the series, I'm going four and a half stars, rounded down to four. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
2
|
Oct 11, 2019
Apr 1994
|
Nov 21, 2019
Jun 30, 1994
|
Jul 18, 2019
|
Mass Market Paperback
| ||||||||||||||
| 0545044251
| 9780545044257
| 0545044251
| 4.74
| 291,461
| Oct 01, 2007
| Oct 16, 2007
|
it was amazing
|
HD Film Tributes music video of the main Harry Potter theme by John Williams. 1/14/24 update: Mama and I watch a movie each month, and each year has a d HD Film Tributes music video of the main Harry Potter theme by John Williams. 1/14/24 update: Mama and I watch a movie each month, and each year has a different theme. 2024 is Harry Potter, and we've decided to read the books in tandem with the movies. This should be fun, and I plan to update my book reviews as I go along. I don't know why I'm putting an update here since I already know none of them will make it onto my "liked movie better" shelf, and I doubt the star rating will change for any of the books. Maybe I'm just doing it for the record. Also for the record, the links below to go my reviews. Original review, 5/17/19: I give the series five stars, easily, yet none of the books gets the whole enchilada (though a couple of them are so close). Sup wit dat? Hell if I know. Perhaps I'm feeling more generous tonight than when I wrote the individual reviews, all of which are linked below. But the facts speak for themselves: I've read/listened to the entire series three times, hit one of the books eight times, and I'm sure I'll read/listen to them again. (It's not exactly difficult material.) If that ain't five star sentiments, then I don't know what is. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone: ★★★★✰ Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets: ★★★✰✰ Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban: ★★★✰✰ Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire: ★★★★✰ (3.5) Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix: ★★★★✰ (3.5) Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince: ★★★★✰ Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: ★★★★✰ Bonus material: Quidditch through the Ages: ★★★✰✰ Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them: ★★✰✰✰ The Tales of Beedle the Bard: ★★★✰✰ ...more |
Notes are private!
|
3
|
Aug 04, 2017
Jan 2010
Jan 2002
|
Mar 20, 2018
Jan 2010
Jul 21, 2007
|
May 17, 2019
|
Hardcover
| ||||||||||||||
| 0393051587
| 9780393051582
| 0393051587
| 4.08
| 850,745
| Dec 17, 1843
| Nov 17, 2004
|
really liked it
|
To be clear, this is a review of The Annotated Christmas Carol, and not a review of A Christmas Carol. It's a tough call, but I consider them to be tw
To be clear, this is a review of The Annotated Christmas Carol, and not a review of A Christmas Carol. It's a tough call, but I consider them to be two different books. Yes, there are a lot of books that have an introduction by someone other than the author, and footnotes, and an appendix. However, those are usually secondary to the main story, and are there for extra reference. This is the opposite. Here, the text to A Christmas Carol is merely provided for reference for the abundant notes about it. This thing is 380 pages long. I know Goodreads claims it's only 266, but it's not including the 114 page introduction which uses roman numerals for page numbers. 93 half pages of this have the text to the story on them, meaning the inner part of the page has the story, and the outer margins (which are quite wide) have footnotes. Let's say it's about 50 pages of story. That leaves 330 pages of other stuff. I'm standing by my assessment: this is a different book from A Christmas Carol, and shouldn't be linked with it on here, but I don't make the rules. It's a shame my four star rating for this will be factored into the overall rating for A Christmas Carol which is five stars all the way as far as I'm concerned. Review for the footnotes to the original text (★★★★✰), read 11/25/19-12/3/19, reviewed 12/5/19: A Christmas Carol is probably my favorite book. The record decrees that it must be. Not only have I read it over 20 times, and continue to read it every December, but I still look forward to it every single year, and every year it still instills me with a sense of wonder; I never get tired of it. So, I was a little nervous going into this annotated version which has about two pages of footnotes for each page of text. You'd think I'd eat such a thing up, but there's danger involved in such a venture. I'll let Mark Twain explain it. [image] "We have not the reverent feeling for the rainbow that a savage has because we know how it is made. We have lost as much as we gained by prying into that matter." When you know too much about something the magic can disappear, but I decided to risk it, and I'm glad I did. I think I can still read this with the same sense of awe that I always have going into it. The only parts that threatened to steal that sensation from me was when the editor, Michael Patrick Hearn, pointed out things that indicated the entire experience was a dream. This has always been a possibility even to my mind, but he seemed to want to prove such a theory. (This might be further explained in the 100 page introduction I haven't read yet.) For example: the Ghost of Christmas Past is supposed to be Scrooge's guttering candle viewed through a haze of sleep. He gives good arguments for his case, but I've never felt it was a dream, and I can only assume that Hearn is one of those nutters who doesn't believe in ghosts, and must put everything into a box he can understand. You know, real world stuff only, no fiddle-faddle that can't be explained by modern science and such. Oh well; it's his loss. I didn't bother to read the text of the story. I'll do that a little later this month with the version I always read that has all the illustrations by Everett Shinn. There were a few illustrations by John Leech in this one. [image] (Fezziwig's party.) And while he was the original artist, I confess I have a soft spot for Shinn's pictures. [image] (The same scene.) Anyway, I don't have to read the story since I'm so familiar with it and could identify the reference without having to look at it 95% of the time. It was nice to just do the footnotes to further my education. The 100 page introduction included with this was more than I signed up for, though I'll probably catch it next December for Christmas reading. I expect that will be more dangerous than just reading the footnotes, but we'll see. The following Christmas I'll probably read the performance copy which Dickens used when acting this out for an audience (which is also in this). That has a 48 page introduction and its own footnotes. There are obscure terms and dated phrases that have confused me ever since the first time I read this. Almost all of them were explained in this book, and that's what I mostly wanted. We also got Dickens' inspiration for certain characters and plot developments, which I also wanted. The notes from various reviewers and critics were interesting as well, as were the notes that explained changes between the original manuscript and the printed copy, not to mention changes in future versions and lines altered for the plays made of this, but I could've lived without them. Hearn occasionally got a little judgemental when he told us Dickens "wisely" cut such and such a line, or expressed a similar sentiment. Even though I agreed with his assessment every time, I could've done without the adverb. Hearn also cross-referenced similarities to Dickens' other works, and while that was neat, I thought it was a bit much. For example, on page 132, he's talking about Old Joe (the owner of the shop where people in the future are hawking Scrooge's stuff), and gives us this footnote: 15. a gray-haired rascal. Unhappy with what he gets for his loot in Charles Webb's 1844 drama A Christmas Carol; or, The Past, Present, and Future, the undertaker's man accuses old Joe of being "worse than any other Jew that ever lived!" Whether this remark was a result of Webb's own antisemitism or was implied by Dickens in his text is not known.Hearn could've stopped there, but didn't, and goes on for almost two whole pages about Jews in Dickens' works, from Fagin in Oliver Twist to Riah in Our Mutual Friend, and he spends a lot of time on Dickens' A Child's History of England where Dickens mostly defends the Jews and shows how horrible life was for them throughout history. This was all informative and neat, but I don't think it belonged as a footnote here, especially since Old Joe is never identified as a Jew in the original text, and I saw nothing to indicate that he might be one. And as if that wasn't enough, he brings the subject up again later with another line, and to my knowledge there aren't any Jewish characters in the story. But again, maybe this is expounded upon in the introduction. I reckon I'll find out next year. Anyway, Hearn knows his stuff, and he did a great job with this. He loses a star for overkill, and thus earns a solid four. Review for the introduction to the original text (★★★✰✰), read 11/26/20-12/5/20, reviewed 12/5/20: Holy moly. This thing has everything I ever wanted to know about A Christmas Carol as well as everything I never wanted to know about it. It talks about the concept, production, artist, inking, and everything. Then there's the reception, who liked it, who didn't, and why or why not. It wasn't religious enough. It was too religious. It was just right. Everything, complete with quotes from everybody and his mother. It discusses the impact it's had on the world and its effect on Christmas ever since. Then there's a literary analysis from Hearn himself, with references and footnotes to other critiques. I liked some of it but was apathetic about the rest. This is neat, and all, but I don't know if everything Hearn claims Dickens was doing was actually going on, or if it was intentional. He describes literary techniques that are a little beyond me, and talks about how different things are symbolic. Even the ruler Scrooge grabs to threaten the caroler is supposed to represent something, though I don't remember what. I figured he grabbed it because it was near at hand, and such a tool is well-suited to beating children. I appreciated learning about it and everything else, but I have to face facts: I was never meant to be an English major. I have friends who would orgasm over this stuff, but I just can't seem to make myself care that much, and my mind kept bringing up something from Stephen King's It when Bill is in a writing course in college and one day says to the class "I don’t understand any of this. Why does a story have to be socio-anything? Politics... culture... history... aren’t those natural ingredients in any story, if it’s told well? I mean... can’t you guys just let a story be a story?" Now, I know this was more than just a story. Dickens had an agenda here, the same one that's in most of his books. He wanted everyone to stop treating poor people like shit and used this platform to get that message out there. That goes without saying. But the rest of it... I'm not convinced. I guess he could be that smart, but if I tried to deftly weave that much literary and social commentary into a tale, my brain would melt. However, there are a lot of people out there a whole lot smarter than I am, and I'm pretty sure Dickens was one of them, so maybe he was doing everything Hearn said he was doing. Still, like I said before, I liked reading the introduction and learning these things, but I still enjoy the story for the story. I guess I don't need to know why I enjoy it. Just knowing that I do enjoy it is good enough for me. Review for the introduction and footnotes to the performance copy (★★★✰✰), read 11/21/21-11/24/21, reviewed 11/25/21: The introduction was mostly a list of where he did performances, what the audiences thought, and what the critics thought. Most people liked it, but there were a few haters. Dickens was also a born actor, and he loved giving readings. During the last couple years of his life, he pretty much performance read himself into his grave, but I reckon he thought it was worth it. The performance copy is shorter than the actual book, and told in four staves instead of five. I confess I didn't read it, and just skimmed it, though if I ever read this aloud to anyone, I'll probably go with this version since I like reading to people even if I'm not the greatest at it. The footnotes, which were sparse compared to the actual book, basically pointed out different gestures Dickens used, such as slamming his fist on the podium at a couple of parts, and how he modulated his voice or enunciated certain words. Sounds like he was quite a ham, but people ate it up. Final analysis: As mentioned before, only people interested in every possible detail about A Christmas Carol and parts of Dickens' life would be able to appreciate this, such as the people in the Dickensians group on here. It's impressive, but it would be overkill for most people. I enjoyed it but don't think I'll ever need to read the whole thing again, though I might check out the footnotes to the real book if I come across a phrase or word I've forgotten and want clarification on. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Nov 25, 2019
|
Nov 24, 2021
|
Jan 04, 2019
|
Hardcover
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
my rating |
|
|
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 4.15
|
really liked it
|
Oct 18, 2023
|
Oct 04, 2023
|
|||||
|
| 4.15
|
really liked it
|
Jan 27, 2024
|
Jul 17, 2022
|
|||||
|
| 3.64
|
liked it
|
Nov 12, 2022
|
Jul 15, 2022
|
|||||
|
| 4.10
|
liked it
|
Jan 21, 2024
|
Jul 15, 2022
|
|||||
|
| 4.06
|
really liked it
|
Apr 18, 2022
|
Jan 01, 2022
|
|||||
|
| 4.10
|
liked it
|
Mar 25, 2022
Jan 15, 1996
|
Jan 01, 2022
|
|||||
|
| 3.96
|
liked it
|
Jan 18, 2022
|
Dec 26, 2021
|
|||||
|
| 4.05
|
liked it
|
Nov 21, 2021
Jan 10, 1996
|
Nov 12, 2021
|
|||||
|
| 4.02
|
liked it
|
Oct 19, 2022
|
Jan 22, 2021
|
|||||
|
| 4.11
|
really liked it
|
Jan 05, 2021
|
Dec 26, 2020
|
|||||
|
| 4.00
|
really liked it
|
Nov 07, 2020
|
Oct 24, 2020
|
|||||
|
| 3.70
|
really liked it
|
Nov 09, 2020
|
Oct 12, 2020
|
|||||
|
| 4.11
|
it was amazing
|
Nov 20, 2020
|
Oct 03, 2020
|
|||||
|
| 4.37
|
really liked it
|
Aug 04, 2020
|
Jul 26, 2020
|
|||||
|
| 4.08
|
really liked it
|
Jul 26, 2020
|
Jul 22, 2020
|
|||||
|
| 4.53
|
it was amazing
|
Jan 25, 2019
Jan 1991
|
Aug 09, 2019
|
|||||
|
| 4.15
|
really liked it
|
Nov 08, 2019
May 31, 1994
|
Jul 18, 2019
|
|||||
|
| 4.34
|
really liked it
|
Nov 21, 2019
Jun 30, 1994
|
Jul 18, 2019
|
|||||
|
| 4.74
|
it was amazing
|
Mar 20, 2018
Jan 2010
Jul 21, 2007
|
May 17, 2019
|
|||||
|
| 4.08
|
really liked it
|
Nov 24, 2021
|
Jan 04, 2019
|
Loading...
